Tag: compassion

Posted on

Woman sues to prove animals are ‘living souls,’ not property by Ed Boks

“Today Show” contributor Scott Stump recently reported on a New Yorker named Elena Zakharova who filed a civil suit in a New York court against an Upper East Side pet store. The store, Raising Rover, sold Zakharova a puppy that developed numerous medical complications. The suit seeks to hold the store liable for the dog’s pain and suffering, and medical bills, as if the dog were a person rather than an inanimate product.

New York law considers pets “property,’ but the complaint wants to change that definition. The goal is to help shut down puppy mills that often mass-produce animals sold in boutique pet stores like Raising Rover, where “Umka” was purchased.

“Umka is a living soul,’ the suit reads. ” She feels love and pain.’

Ownership of Raising Rover has changed since Zakharova purchased Umka.

“I know nothing about the sale. The prior owner has the records. We are careful about where we get our puppies,” Raising Rover’s new owner Ben Logan told the New York Daily News. Logan declined to provide information about the prior owner.

Zakharova is seeking compensation for surgeries and medical treatment for Umka totaling about $8,000. She also wants a full return of the dog’s sale price plus interest since the date of purchase in February 2011. Zakharova intends to donate any award to an animal charity, Lask said.

New York state has a “Puppy Lemon Law’ that allows buyers to return sick animals to a pet store within 14 days for a full refund. The law is meant to slow puppy mills’ mass production of dogs with inherent medical problems. However, Umka’s medical issues did not become apparent for months after Zakharova purchased the dog.

“The Puppy Lemon Law doesn’t cut it,’ Lask said.

If the definition of a pet is changed from property to a sentient being, it could substantially change the amount of damages awarded when an owner buys a defective dog born in a puppy mill. That could have a chilling effect on pet stores buying animals from puppy mills fearing large payouts from lawsuits.

“It’s going to put a number on my dog’s broken hips that you created because you’re negligent, you’re greedy, and you’re mass-producing puppies,’ Lask said. “Right now, even if you return it, they just kill it, which is so inhumane.’

Lask is an animal lover who owns a Chihuahua named Lincoln who was found to have a hole in his skull months after her purchase. That discovery led her to investigate the practices of puppy mills. She waited six years to find a case to help correct the larger issue.

“It’s much bigger than this case,’ she said. “I am looking to shut down the puppy mill world.’

The main issue will be proving to a judge that pets are living souls who experience feelings of pain and emotion. “Human beings have treated other humans as property in history before recognizing it was wrong,” said Lask, “so it’s not too much of a stretch to ask the courts to change the definition.”

“It’s already a felony to abuse an animal. If animals have criminal rights, why not put rights on a damaged leg or a heart condition? If we’re not equating (an animal) to a human being, and we’re not equating it to a table, there has to be something in the middle.’

The suit brings to light the practices of puppy mills and their damaging effects on animals and their human owners. A 2011 investigation by The Humane Society of the United States revealed that Raising Rover, where Umka was purchased, was one of 11 upscale pet stores that purchased animals from Midwestern puppy mills with horrendous conditions.

The moral of the story is buyer beware! Experts agree consumers should opt to adopt from shelters to avoid the trauma that comes from paying exorbitant fees for pet store animals with hidden defects.

Posted on

Circle of compassion rippling through universities by Ed Boks

The New York Times recently ran an article by James Gorman on the status of animals in universities across the United States.

Historically, academia relegated animals to the province of science. Rats were confined to psychology labs; cows to veterinary barns; monkeys to neuroscience labs; and preserved frogs to the dissecting tables of undergraduates. At the same time, the attention of liberal arts and social sciences was directed solely toward human interests.

No more. This spring Harvard is offering “Humans, Animals and Cyborgs,” while Dartmouth presents “Animals and Women in Western Literature” and New York University offers “Animals, People and Those in Between.”

These courses evidence a growing interest in animal studies. In fact, anything having to do with any connection between humans and animals in art, literature, sociology, anthropology, film, theater, philosophy, and religion is fair game for animal studies.

The Animals and Society Institute, itself only six years old, lists more than 100 animal studies courses in American universities. Institutes, book series and conferences are proliferating as formal academic programs emerge.

Wesleyan University, with the Animals and Society Institute, began a summer fellowship program this year. Michigan State now allows doctoral and master’s students in different fields to concentrate their work in animal studies. At least two institutions offer undergraduate majors, and New York University is allowing undergraduates to minor in animal studies.

Scholars never actually ignored animals. Thinkers and writers of all ages grappled with human/animal issues and the treatment of animals. However, the current burst of interest is unprecedented.

Jane Desmond of the University of Illinois, a cultural anthropologist, says public sensitivities are largely responsible for all the animal attention.

The trend may be traced back to Jane Goodall, who first showed us the social and emotional side of chimpanzees in a way we could not ignore. Most recently the popular YouTube video of a New Caledonian crow bending a wire into a tool to fish food out of a container caused academics to wonder how old a child would have to be to figure that out.

The most direct influence may have come from philosophy. Peter Singer’s 1975 book “Animal Liberation” was a landmark in arguing against killing, eating and experimenting on animals. He questioned how humans could justify causing animals pain.

Lori Gruen, head of philosophy and coordinator of the summer fellowship program in animal studies at Wesleyan, said, “Thirty years ago animals were at the margins of philosophical discussions; now animals are in the center of ethical discussion.”

Another strain of philosophy, exemplified by the French writer Jacques Derrida, has had an equally strong influence. He considered the way we think of animals, and why we distance ourselves from them. In “The Animal that Therefore I Am,” he discusses not only what he thinks of his cat, but what his cat thinks of him.

What animals think is something scholars are taking more seriously. Referring to academic programs that focused on disenfranchised populations like women or African-Americans, Dr. Weil of Wesleyan said, “Unlike (those populations, animals) can’t speak or write in language the academy recognizes.” This communication deficit lent itself to academics raising moral arguments on behalf of the animals.

The great variety of subjects, methods, interests and assumptions in animal studies raises serious questions about how it all hangs together. Law schools have courses in animals and the law; veterinary schools have courses about the human connection to animals; and some courses use animals in therapy as part of animal studies.

None of this diversity diminishes the excitement in what’s going on, although there are some academics within the animal studies rubric who think the scholarly ferment has a long way to go before it can truly consider itself an academic field.

One thing the new interest in animal studies does not lack is energy. If you want to better understand what all the scholarly excitement is about visit your local shelter for your homework assignment and adopt a pet today.

Posted on

Should compassion be outlawed by Ed Boks

Ed Boks and feral catsThat is the question being debated in Beverly Hills this month. The debate officially began on Wednesday, July 1st, when a 65-year-old Feral Cat Colony Manager named Katherine Varjian appeared before a judge in the Beverly Hills courthouse charged with the crime of feeding feral cats.

To be sure there are some technical issues regarding the law and Beverly Hills’ contract with LA Animal Services, but this case begs a fundamental question, “should compassion be outlawed?”

While I am sure no one in Beverly Hills wants to outlaw compassion, it should be understood that criminalizing the feeding of feral cats does just that. Although municipalities may deliberately or inadvertently outlaw compassion by ordinance, they can never stop it. When compassion is outlawed compassionate people will turn outlaw before denying their better angels. Ms. Varjian may be a case in point.

This case presents Beverly Hills with the opportunity to once again take a national leadership position; just as they did in December, 2008 when they officially became a “Guardian City.” In that decision, the Beverly Hills City Council demonstrated their compassionate intentions by “recognizing animals as Individuals, not objects”, adopting programs designed to “change public attitudes towards animals and provide positive impacts on local communities”, and “decrease animal abuse and abandonment.”

Surely this commitment and this case present a unique opportunity for the City of Beverly Hills to expand the circle of compassion to include feral cats.

What Are Our Choices: Communities typically employ one of three methodologies to deal with feral cats: 1) Do nothing, 2) Eradication, or 3) Trap/Neuter/Return (TNR).

While it is easy to understand why doing nothing has little effect on reducing feral cat populations (and, in fact, encourages growth), it may not be as easy to understand why eradication does not work.

Although some communities continue to employ eradication (“do not feed” “catch and kill”) as a remedy, decades of eradication efforts in communities across the United States has irrefutably demonstrated that this methodology does not work. There are two very real biological reasons why eradication fails every time.

Wild animals tend to have strong biological survival mechanisms. Feral cats, which are wild animals, typically live in colonies of six to twenty cats. You often never see all the cats in a colony and it is easy to underestimate the number of feral cats in a neighborhood. When individuals or authorities try to catch cats for extermination this heightens the biological stress on the colony.

This stress triggers two survival mechanisms causing the cats to 1) over breed, and 2) over produce. That is, rather than having one litter of two to three kittens per year, a stressed female could have two or three litters per year of six to nine kittens.

Even if a community was successful in catching and removing all the feral cats from a neighborhood, a phenomenon called “the vacuum effect” would be created.

When some or all the cats in a colony are removed, cats in surrounding neighborhoods gravitate toward the ecological niche vacated. When a colony is removed but the natural conditions (including food sources) remain, the natural deterrents offered by an existing colony of territorial cats evaporate and the neighboring cats quickly enter the newly open territory, bringing with them all the associated annoying behaviors.

As we’ve seen time after time in location after location all over the country, the end result of the “catch and kill” methodology is always the same: The vacated neighborhood quickly finds itself overrun again with feral cats fighting and caterwauling for mates, over breeding, and spraying to mark their new territory. “Catch and kill” never provides a lasting solution and can easily exacerbate the problem.

Albert Einstein defined “insanity” as doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. That is why so many communities are abandoning the failed “catch and kill” methodologies in favor of trying the newest and only humane, non-lethal alternative: TNR (Trap/Neuter/Return).

TNR is being practiced in more and more communities across the United States and around the world with amazing results.

While I was in Maricopa County, TNR was so successful that the County Board of Supervisors enacted a resolution declaring TNR the only viable methodology they would approve for addressing the feral cat problem in this County of 24 cities and towns (including Phoenix) spread out across nearly 1,000 square miles.

While in New York City, we observed a 73% reduction in the number of stray cats impounded in a targeted zip code on the Upper West Side of Manhattan over a 42-month period of practicing TNR. TNR, correctly administered, is the only methodology that guarantees a reduction of the feral cat population in a community.

When TNR is employed effectively, all the feral cats in a neighborhood are trapped, sterilized, and returned to the area where they were trapped. They are returned under the care of a Colony Manager. The Colony Manager is a trained volunteer in the neighborhood willing to feed, water, and care for the colony and watch for any new cats. Once the colony cats are all neutered, new cats tend to be recently abandoned domestics that can be captured and placed for adoption.

Ms. Varjian is a Certified Feral Cat Colony Manager; trained and certified by Dona Cosgrove Baker, President and Founder of the nationally recognized Feral Cat Caretakers’ Coalition.

There are many benefits to TNR: 1) TNR prevents the vacuum effect from occurring. 2) TNR dramatically mitigates the troubling behaviors of intact cats: fighting and caterwauling for mates, and spraying for territory. 3) Altered cats provide rat abatement, a service many neighborhoods value, such as the Flower District in Los Angeles, and 4) because feral cats tend to only live one-third their natural life span the problem literally solves itself through attrition, provided TNR is implemented community wide.

TNR also addresses the concern that feral cats tend to create a public nuisance on campuses and in parks. There is an old adage that claims you can’t herd cats. In fact, you can herd neutered cats because they tend to hang around the food bowl. Because neutered cats no longer have the urge to breed and prey, they tend to follow the food bowl wherever the Colony Manager takes it. Feral cats can be trained to congregate in campus or park areas out of the way of the public or other wildlife.

When you review LA’s statistics it is clear that free-roaming cats represent our biggest challenge to achieving No-Kill.

Nothing hinders Beverly Hills from joining the City of Glendale and other communities who have already embraced TNR. It is my hope that Katherine Varjian’s case will open the door to a deliberative dialogue on the effectiveness of TNR for our residents, our wildlife and our feral cats.

Citizens interested in voicing their opinion on this matter can attend the next Beverly Hills City Council meeting where the question of reinstating a prohibition on feeding feral cats will be reconsidered. The question is much bigger than feeding or not feeding feral cats. The question that needs to be answered is, can we as a community come up with a humane, non-lethal solution to our feral cat problems. I believe the answer is a resounding “Yes”.

The next Beverly Hills City Council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August 4th at 7 p.m. at the Beverly Hills City Council, Rm. 400 (Council Chambers) located at 455 N. Rexford Drive, Beverly Hills, CA 90210.

If you cannot attend you can voice your opinion by contacting your Beverly Hills representative by letter, e-mail, fax or phone. (Phone: 310-285-1013, Fax: 310-275-8159)

Posted on

The California Humane Farms Initiative by Ed Boks

Ed Boks and factory farmingCalifornians for Humane Farms is an initiative sponsored by The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), Farm Sanctuary and many other animal protection groups, family farmers, veterinarians and public health professionals. This coalition is waging a ballot initiative campaign in California to pass The Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act in the November 2008 election.

Supporters of the initiative claim The Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act asks for only the most basic needs for farm animals: merely the ability to turn around and extend their limbs. It is hard to imagine a more moderate initiative. HSUS explains the purpose of the measure is to prevent three methods of the allegedly most cruel and inhumane forms of extreme confinement in the world of animal agribusiness: veal crates, battery cages, and gestation crates. All three of these practices have already been legislated against in the European Union.

Proponents claim the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act will reduce the suffering of nearly 20 million animals confined in California factory farms. The measure will also prevent other out-of-state factory farm operators from setting up shop in our state with veal crates, battery cages, and gestation crates. Florida, Arizona, and Oregon have banned gestation crates, and Arizona has banned veal crates. Some major California food retailers are already moving away from supporting battery cages and veal and gestation crates.

Gestation crates are used to confine a sow for nearly her whole four-month pregnancy. Right before giving birth, she is moved from the gestation crate into a farrowing crate – a metal stall designed to separate her from her nursing piglets. After the piglets are weaned prematurely, the sow is re-impregnated and confined again in a gestation crate. Farrowing crates are exempted from this measure.

Nearly 800,000 Californians have already stepped up to sign a petition to put this seemingly modest proposal on the November ballot. The petition calls for all Californians to come together to end what many consider to be the cruelest confinement techniques used on factory farms – both in terms of the intensity and duration of confinement. Petitioners assert that keeping animals so restrictively crated that they can barely move for months on end is cruel and inhumane.

Posted on

IMPLEMENTING THE NO-KILL EQUATION IN LOS ANGELES – Part X: A Compassionate Director

This is the tenth posting in a series of messages responding to the recommendations of a so-called “No-Kill Equation”. The “No-Kill Equation” is comprised of ten commonsense, long-standing practices embraced and implemented by LA Animal Services with remarkable results.

This analysis compares the “No-Kill Equation” to LA’s programs and practices. Today’s message focuses on the tenth recommendation of the “No-Kill Equation,” which is A Compassionate Director.

The Ten “No-Kill Equation” Recommendations are:
1. Feral Cat TNR Program
2. High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter
3. Rescue Groups
4. Foster Care
5. Comprehensive Adoption Program
6. Pet Retention
7. Medical and Behavioral Rehabilitation
8. Public Relations/Community Involvement
9. Volunteers
10. A Compassionate Director

The No-Kill Equation is in this blue font.

The analysis will be in italics.

X. A Compassionate Director
The final element of the No Kill equation is the most important of all, without which all other elements are thwarted—a hard working, compassionate animal control or shelter director not content to regurgitate tired clichés or hide behind the myth of “too many animals, not enough homes.” Unfortunately, this one is also oftentimes the hardest one to demand and find.

But it is clear—as better than a decade of success in San Francisco, Tompkins County, and now elsewhere demonstrates—that No Kill is simply not achievable without rigorous implementation of each and every one of these programs and services. It is up to us in the humane movement to demand them of our local shelters, and no longer to settle for illusory excuses and smokescreens shelters often put up in order to avoid implementing them.

This analysis was provided by Mayor Villaraigosa’s office:  LA Animal Services’ current General Manager Ed Boks, hired in January 2006, is a retired pastor and former organizational development consultant.  Boks brings a unique blend of management competencies to the Department, including more than three decades of animal welfare experience where he successfully introduced and implemented No Kill principles and programs as described in the “No-Kill Equation” in two of the largest animal care and control programs in the United States, Maricopa County, Arizona and New York City.

While in Maricopa County and New York City, Boks received numerous awards and recognitions for his “groundbreaking work to introduce his No-Kill mission, educate and involve the community, and protect the lives of lost and homeless pets now and for years to come.”

Boks is nationally recognized by such organizations as In Defense of Animals (IDA) who presented him with a lifetime achievement award for “an extraordinary life of kindness, compassion, commitment and achievement dedicated to ending homelessness and for providing compassionate care for homeless animals.” Alley Cat Alliance recognized Boks for his “vision and foresight to recognize TNR as the effective, ethical solution to feral cat overpopulation.”

His compassionate philosophy and programs have been profiled in USA Today, The New York Times, The New York Post, The Los Angeles Times, The Arizona Republic, and Newsweek, Best Friends, and Cat Fancy magazines.

During Boks’ tenure in Los Angeles he has been recognized by Fred Bergendorff’s The Pet Place television show for “coming to the aid of animals and in doing so displaying selfless acts of courage, heroism and compassion” and by Voice For The Animals Foundation for his leadership role in “protecting the welfare of animals” through the Los Angeles Animal Cruelty Task Force.

Boks demonstrably possesses the knowledge and experience to guide LA Animal Services in the No Kill direction and has actively promoted a philosophy comparable to that expressed in the “No Kill Equation” for many years.

Boks brought in a new human resources team to institute vigorous performance review and disciplinary procedures consistent with City requirements that the Department had not routinely followed for many years. Training in a variety of skills and information areas is being offered to staff on a regular basis. “Secret shoppers” visit the animal care centers and critique conditions, customer service, signage and other aspects of operations to aid management in fine-tuning those operations and upgrading staff performance.

The Department’s veterinary team has been completely reconstituted and its management and administrative teams re-structured, rebuilt and reinvigorated. Additionally, the Department is systematically pursuing legislative amendments to improve its ability to promote adoptions and retention, fight animal cruelty and illegal animal sales, and address other issues of concern to the humane community and pertinent to the pursuit of its No Kill goal.

Since coming to Los Angeles Boks has applied his expertise to feral cat issues, spay/neuter issues, rescue groups and foster care programs, adoption and pet retention efforts, medical and behavioral rehabilitation, public relations and community involvement. The Department continues to progress via increasing adoptions and reducing euthanasia since his arrival.  In fact, in 2007 under Boks’ leadership the Department achieved its most significant decrease in euthanasia in any one-year period – 22%, which confers upon the City of LA one of the lowest euthanasia rates in the nation.

Posted on

A Celebration of Compassion: Be Kind to Animals Week by Ed Boks

Be Kind to Animals Week was the first large-scale campaign to bring attention to animal welfare in the United States. The idea extended from “Mercy Sunday”, a partnership between American Humane and clergy in several states. But the need for a more cohesive, nationwide campaign was seen as a natural outgrowth of the association’s mission and its collaboration with humane societies throughout the country.

In 1914, plans were discussed to expand the movement to create a unified celebration on a national level. Dr. William O. Stillman, president of the American Humane, believed strongly in a systemic approach that would bring the “tenets of kindness to those who would not otherwise be brought under its influence.” The objectives were to heighten public awareness through humane education, highlight the work of humane societies, and again ask clergy to speak about child and animal welfare issues on what had been renamed “Humane Sunday.”

The inaugural Be Kind to Animals Week, May 17-23, 1915, was a revolutionary concept. With radio in its infancy, and long before television, American Humane effectively used the media of the day to promote the observance in 43 of 48 states. Posters and literature were distributed, and local newspapers helped publicize the events, resulting in a tremendous response.

Over the years, Be Kind to Animals Week has continued to grow and embed itself into the popular lexicon and the public’s consciousness. In 1973, the children’s TV show Romper Room promoted it, and in 1990, Congress passed a resolution declaring May 6-12 as Be Kind to Animals Week and National Pet Week. It also has been featured in thousands of news stories and even in comic strips, including Dennis the Menace and Mutts.

In 2007, the 93-year tradition continues with a weeklong celebration of kindness and compassion May 6-12. [From Spring Issue of “The National Humane Review” pg. 5]

LA Animal Services is celebrating Be Kind To Animals Week with a week-long Adoption Promotion to encourage Angelenos to do the kindest thing of all – provide a loving home to a homeless pet. From May 6 through May 13, all adoption fees will be reduced by 50%!

Posted on

Compassion: Our Last Great Hope by Ed Boks

I was recently asked what my last Blog about “compassion” has to do with fulfilling Animal Services’ mission to “promote and protect the health, safety and welfare of animals and people in the City of Los Angeles.”

I was surprised when this seemingly compassionate person stated she was not comfortable with the General Manager of LA Animal Services espousing “religion” to express the idea of enlarging the circle of compassion to include all species, especially our companion animals and local wildlife.

Its interesting that the word “religion” means to “reconnect” as in fixing something that is broken. One does not need to be religious to want to fix a broken system. Clearly our animal welfare community is broken, and as the renowned Veterinarian/Philosopher Leo K. Bustad demonstrated throughout his life and teachings, “Compassion is our last great Hope“.

Finding fault with compassion, however it is expressed, is serious evidence of a broken society for all the reasons cited in my last Blog.

This person’s misguided concern over how or where compassion is discussed reminded me of an excerpt from “The Velveteen Rabbit”, when the Rabbit asked the Skin Horse what it means to be “Real”. The Skin Horse responded:

“Real isn’t how you are made. It’s a thing that happens to you. When a child loves you for a long, long time, not just to play with, but REALLY loves you, then you become Real… It doesn’t happen all at once. You become. It takes a long time. That’s why it doesn’t often happen to people who break easily, or have sharp edges, or who have to be carefully kept. Generally, by the time you are Real, most of your hair has been loved off, and your eyes drop out and you get loose in the joints and very shabby. But these things don’t matter at all, because once you are Real you can’t be ugly, except to people who don’t understand.”

To people who don’t understand the importance of Compassion, everything must appear ugly, which probably explains why they can only espouse ugliness and intollerance in all their discourse.

I’m convinced most Angelinos are persuaded by better angels – after all, (forgive the religous reference), we are the City of Angels…

The Good News is, we are not unique, as this recent article in Time Magazine indicates:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1573345,00.html?cnn=yes

According to David Favre, a professor at the Michigan State University College of Law, who has studied animal rights laws for 20 years, what we are experiencing in Los Angeles is a “grass roots movement” of compassion occuring across the United States – from a concern for feral cats, spaying and neutering, and local shelters. “It is not unlike the environmental movement when I was in law school. Animal welfare is a growing social interest”, explains Favre.

Every movement has started with a small group of enlightened individuals calling attention to an injustice. When these people expressed a valid concern, it would touch the hearts and compassion of others and a movement would grow until it reached a tipping point. Once a movement hit a tipping point, and more people were aware of an injustice than those who were not, it was then time to shift gears and focus attention on solving the problem.

We get it. Killing animals is bad. Now lets work together to figure out real solutions to end it. We have passed the “tipping point” in Los Angeles. Unlike so many communities in the United States, we have a Mayor, a City Council, an Animal Services Commission and a General Manager who all champion this noble goal and are calling upon the entire community to rally together until it is finally achieved. There is no going back. No-Kill in LA is inevitable.

Curiously, the most vocal in calling attention to the “catch and kill” injustice practiced by our community, now refuse, when the opportunity for success is greatest, to devote their resources and energy to actually achieving “no-kill”.

With the American Revolution as a rare exception, it seems most revolutionaries find it easier to continue casting stones after winning the day than they do stopping to gather stones together. (Is this a religious reference or a Pete Seeger song popularized by the Byrds?) Why do some only see ugliness and refuse to understand that this is the time they have been waiting for? Why do they argue while animals are still dying, when together we could end it quicker!

The City of Los Angeles has established a challenging goal – to make Los Angeles the first major “no-kill” city in the United States. We know that each year millions of lost and homeless pets are euthanized in the United States for no other reason than there are not enough loving homes for them. Los Angeles Animal Services is committed to ending this barbaric practice once and for all.

This is not a new goal. Los Angeles has made the greatest progress towards achieving No-Kill when compared to any other community in the United States by reducing euthanasia 50% over the past 5 years and another 14.6% in 2006 in the case of our canine friends! Animal Services experienced nearly a 70% live release rate for dogs in 2006! (A 2006 Annual Report is forthcoming and will include data on all species and programs.)

To achieve “no-kill”, Animal Services has and will continue to initiate innovative and progressive programs. Not the least of which is the opening of six new, state of the art Animal Care Centers. These centers look more like botanical gardens than animal shelters and will be the pride of Los Angeles as they set the gold standard for municipal animal shelters. Animal Services is already the largest animal rescue and pet adoption agency in California, and these new shelters will greatly increase the number of pets placed into loving homes.

With the new Centers we are also opening six new state of the art spay/neuter clinics. A year ago, these clinics were not even scheduled to open until 2008 at the earliest. Today, they are on the fast track to completion and will all be open before this summer. Each clinic is designed to surgically alter 20,000 pets annually. With Animal Services altering 120,000 pets each year, Los Angeles will quickly see a reduction in the number of lost and homeless pets coming into our shelters. This decrease in the number of unwanted pets in Los Angeles will allow us to provide even greater care to the animals still finding their way into our new Care Centers.

Animal Services is an all inclusive organization willing to work and partner with any organization or person wanting to make a constructive difference. We currently partner with over 70 animal welfare organizations in the greater LA area in a program called “New Hope“. This program truly offers new hope to nearly 7,000 animals that would have had no hope at all without the help of these great organizations.

Beginning in 2006, Animal Services made thousands of animals available to our New Hope Partners at no cost, including free spay/neuter surgery, free vaccinations and medical care up until the time of release (and sometimes afterwards) and free microchips. Partners are provided 24/7 access to the Centers to evaluate and work with the animals, and even have a “personal shopper” in each Center who alerts them to animals they are interested in helping.

Animal Services’ Big Fix Program provides spay/neuter services to our community’s most needy pet owners to ensure no pet is left unaltered just because the owner can’t afford the pet’s surgery. Feral cats are also provided spay/neuter through Operation FELIX (Feral Education and Love Instead of X-termination).

Our STAR (Special Treatment And Recovery) Program is designed to help the hundreds of animals rescued by Animal Services who are sick, injured, abused, or neglected. These animals would have been euthanized if not for this life saving program!

Animal Services’ Bottle Baby Program is designed to provide bottle feeding to the hundreds of orphaned neonate puppies and kittens who are brought into Animal Services each year. Before this program was established these animals had no chance at survival. We are also in the process of finalizing our Evidence Animal Foster Program which will for the first time permit evidence animals (victims of cruelty crimes) to be placed in the homes and care of compassionate volunteers so they don’t languish in a shelter for months or longer while the case is being adjudicated. Today Animal Services’ volunteers and staff provide Foster Homes to orphaned neonates, sick, injured, abused and neglected animals relieving them of the trauma of long term shelter confinement and thus making room for other animals to have longer periods of time to be adopted.

Animal Services is about more than just pets, we are about people too. In 2007 we will launch our Teach Love and Compassion (TLC) Program. This program is designed to assist “at risk” kids by providing them an opportunity to care for “at risk” animals. Many of our community’s kids are all too aware of the harsh realities of abuse or neglect, and many know what it means to have a loving foster home to go to. TLC will enlarge the circle of compassion by allowing these kids to care for lost and homeless pets that have been abused, neglected, and are in need of foster care.

Later this program will be expanded to include our community’s senior citizens and others making our Animal Care Centers true community centers in every sense of the word, and all rotating around LA’s love for it’s lost and homeless pets!

This is just a sampling of the programs of LA Animal Services, with many more to come. For more information about LA Animal Services and how you can help, visit www.laanimalservices.com

2007 is a golden opportunity for LA to come together as a community to maximize all our efforts and resources to expand the circle of compassion to effectively help our community’s lost and homeless animals and finally achieve No-Kill for all the dogs, cats, rabbits, pocket pets, wildlife, farm animals and exotics who come through the doors of Animal Services. I’m hoping you will decide to be part of the solution by helping Animal Services help the animals in our care.

Compassion is our last great hope!

Posted on

Enlarging The Circle of Compassion by Ed Boks

Albert Schweitzer once said, “It is not always granted to the sower to live to see the harvest. All work that is worth anything is done in —FAITH.”

We are an extremely fortunate people. Unlike Albert Schweitzer, we are seeing the harvest. We are seeing the results of both his and our hard work; a work begun in faith. A Jewish Proverb says, “Despise not the day of small beginnings.”

To be sure, the No-Kill movement started small. But why is Nl-Kill receiving so much attention lately; and why here, in Los Angeles, the City of Angels? Is it a coincidence that No-Kill is so quickly rising to a place of national notice? Is it a coincidence that No-Kill is getting so much recognition just now?

We live in troubled times; a time of war and rumors of war. A time of fear so great that men’s hearts are failing them because of what they see coming upon the earth.

We live in a time when just reading the daily newspaper or listening to the evening news can cause you to question the value of life. I remember growing up as a boy in Detroit and listening to the morning newscaster on my way to school. Each day he would begin the News by asking the question “What’s a life in Detroit worth today?” And then he would give an account of how someone’s life had been snuffed out the night before for $20, or a pair of sneakers, or because someone didn’t like the way a person looked at them.

I find it interesting that No-Kill is suddenly receiving so much national attention during a time of unprecedented violence in the world. I’m reminded of a letter that was written by an itinerant preacher named Paul to a group of Romans 2,000 years ago. In his letter he addressed the violence of that generation by explaining, “that where sin, death and violence abound, grace and truth does much more abound.” The darker the world seems to get, the brighter the light of truth and compassion. In a Country where the literal wholesale slaughter of animals is common practice, No-Kill stands as a brilliant contrast and contradiction to the way we live as a community. In a world where people kill each other while claiming they are doing God’s will, it is fascinating to hear stories of how Palestinians and Israelis will join forces to tend feral cat colonies during a cease-fire.

Today, we live in a time when our national leaders are grappling with defining “good” and “evil”. They tell us that we are good and we are at war with evil.

I think it is true that the war between good and evil is manifesting in our age like no other. What is interesting about Good and Evil is that so many try to define good and evil with words alone. However, there is only one way that good and evil can truly be understood or defined, and it is not by what you believe or by what you think, but by what you do. Good and evil are defined and understood by our actions.

On September 11, 2001, we all saw evil manifested in the desperate and hateful act of 19 religious men killing thousands of innocent men, women and children in New York City. Some questioned, as they should, how can religion bring men to do such evil while they think they are doing good?

Albert Schweitzer answered this question for us when he said, “Any religion that is not based on a respect for life is not a true religion.” Abraham Lincoln said it another way, “I care not for any man’s religion whose dog or cat is not better for it.”

So what is the significance of the No-Kill initiative in Los Angeles as we enter the year 2007, just five years and three months following 9/11?

Before I answer that question, I need to talk about evolution. In the theory of evolution, Charles Darwin explained that a species evolves by adapting to a changing environment. He further explained that only those members of the species “fit” enough to adapt are fortunate enough to survive. Today we live in a changing environment, an environment defined within the context of a war between good and evil. If that is the case, how will nature determine who is fit to adapt and survive?

More to the point, are we fit enough to adapt and survive to our changing environment? Are you fit enough to adapt and survive?

I am confident the answer to that question is a resounding YES. And the reason for my confidence may surprise you. I think the evidence that suggests we are adapting well to our changing environment is found in the fact that we are attempting to achieve No-Kill in Los Angeles, New York City, and more and more communities each year following 9/11.

I agree with our national leaders when they tell us we are at war with evil. But I hasten to caution that we not make the mistake of thinking this is only an external war, a war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The outward war is merely a manifestation of an internal war; the real war is in and for our own hearts and minds. This war can’t be won through outrageous acts of violence on the battlefield or in the street, not by dropping bombs on each other or by throwing red paint on each other. This war is won by our becoming what we espouse; by living our beliefs.

Faith and reverence for life is the only antidote for the madness that seems to be engulfing the world today. Our reverence for life is the light of the world. The antidote is so simple that it is easily missed, and millions miss it every day.

Schweitzer warned that, “Anyone who can regard the life of any creature as worthless is in danger of thinking human lives are worthless.”

Are we, as a society, in danger of thinking the life of any creature is worthless? I think that before No-Kill came along we could argue, in our ignorance, that we had little choice but to kill unwanted dogs and cats in our attempt to control over population. But with clear evidence that NO-KILL is achievable, can we not now argue, along with Albert Schweitzer, that if we chose to ignore No-Kill initiatives we are but one step removed from thinking human life has no value?

Over the years psychologists and law enforcement agencies have come to understand the link between animal cruelty and spousal, child, and elder abuse, and other forms of domestic violence. Violence does not discriminate against victims. If that link exists in the life of a person, could it be true of a community? Can a community’s insistence on catch and kill programs, when humane non-lethal alternatives exist, be the link that reveals a community’s lack of respect for human life?

Not all human life perhaps. A community may start with feeling that the lives of its enemies are worthless. Then perhaps those people who don’t agree with its religious or political beliefs. And if Schweitzer is correct, such an unthinking attitude could lead to the abuse of our aged, our young, our infirmed, and impoverished. When we begin to devalue life, where does it end? It ends only when a community decides to value all life.

Consider the biblical story in which two ancient towns are threatened with destruction because their inhabitants are perceived as living violent, self-absorbed lives. A decidely old school intervention is staged whereby the possibility that 50, 40 or even as few as 5 “righteous men” might live there leads to the possibility that the towns might be spared. If Abraham could prevail upon God to make compassionate decisions, then perhaps we can prevail upon our community to do the same.

Now there may be some who may find fault with my comparing the lives of 5 righteous men to the tens of thousands of lost and homeless dogs and cats living in Los Angeles. But if you do, it would be because you’re overlooking the moral of the analogy. The moral of the analogy is not that the lives of feral cats or lost and homeless pets are equal to the lives of men. The moral is that when we, as compassionate human beings, can value the lives of creatures as seemingly insignificant as dogs and cats, we will begin to understand the true capacity of our own souls to make compassionate, life-affirming choices.

Mahatma Gandhi taught us that the only way to determine the true value of a community is to look at how that community treats their animals. Community value is not determined by our political rhetoric, or by our wonderful community and public health programs, or by our art galleries, libraries and parks alone. Our true value according to Mahatma Gandhi is found in the way we treat our animals. So if we as the greatest City in the world can develop a life-affirming program for the lowliest of all creatures, our lost and homeless pets, what does that say about us as a community?

According to Schweitzer, No-Kill is what makes us truly human. His exact words were, “It is a man’s sympathy with all creatures that truly makes him human.”

That is the role of LA Animal Services, to speak on behalf of the voiceless. Schweitzer warned us to never let the voice of humanity within us be silenced because it is our sympathy for all creatures that defines us as truly human and good. There was another holy man who said, “As much as you have done it unto the least of these, you have done it unto Me.”

Again, it is not my intention to offend anyone’s religious sensibilities, so if you are offended by what might sound like my equating dogs and cats to the lowliest of humans, you have missed my point. I am not talking about the value of lost and homeless pets; I am actually trying to explain the human capacity to love. The capacity to love not only our friends, our neighbors, or even our enemies, but to even love the thousands of pets that find their way into our City Animal Care Centers.

When Albert Schweitzer received the Nobel Peace Prize he gave an acceptance speech titled, “The Problem of Peace in the World Today.” In that speech he said, “The human spirit is not dead. It lives on in secret and it has come to understand that the full breadth and depth of compassion can only be known when it embraces all living creatures and does not limit itself to mankind alone.”

I spoke earlier about Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. It may surprise you that as a former Pastor I believe in evolution, but not in the same way Darwin did. I believe compassion is the catalyst for our evolutionary growth. In fact, I believe compassion is the only evolutionary force left to us for our own human development. In earlier ages we had to rely on physical strength to survive, in more recent ages we had to rely on our mental strength to survive. Today I think we rise or fall as a species depending on our capacity to love all creatures, great and small. Our survival as a species depends on our ability to extend the circle of compassion to include all creatures. The world does not belong to those who embrace cruelty; the world belongs to those who can love greatly.

Scientists talk about evolution in terms of biology. I think evolution is not so much a biological force as it is a spiritual force. It is not merely a force that makes men out of monkeys; it is a force that can turn men into angels.

Love can be a pretty ethereal term, but we can all understand the concept of kindness and mercy. Once you begin to think kindly and mercifully about life, you begin to truly appreciate the value of life, and when you truly understand the value of live, you become what Schweitzer calls a “thinking being”, and as a thinking being you find yourself looking for ways to act compassionately and mercifully towards all life.

Schweitzer said, “The man who has become a thinking being feels a compulsion to give every ‘will-to-live’ the same reverence for life that he gives his own life.”

In other words, if you are a thinking being you will love your fellow creature as you love yourself… You will extend the Golden Rule to include other species.

According to Schweitzer, a person is not even a thinking being if he cannot reverence the will-to-live in other creatures.

We live in a day and a world where 19 men can fly airplanes into buildings with the malicious intent of killing thousands of fellow human beings. We also live in a day when hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people will devote their lives and their resources to help Los Angeles achieve No-Kill. These two acts in my view define Good and Evil.

But let me be clear, you don’t have to fly an airplane into a building to manifest evil. All you have to do is understand that thousands of animals are dying in animal shelters every year and do nothing about it. According to Schweitzer that is also an evil act. Schweitzer recognized that it was often in such thoughtlessness that evil most often manifests itself.

He explained, “Very little of the great cruelty shown by men can really be attributed to cruelty. Most of it comes from thoughtlessness or inherited habit. The roots of cruelty are not so much strong as they are widespread.”

Think about that. The roots of cruelty are not so much strong as they are widespread. That explains why an act of kindness is so powerful. It is powerful because it is stronger than cruelty; cruelty is shallow and weak. If all men could live their lives in kindness and mercy towards all creatures, soon the light of compassion would overwhelm the darkness of unthinking and habitual cruelty.

Albert Schweitzer said a day would come when “people will be amazed that the human race existed so long before it recognized that thoughtless injury to life was incompatible with truth, love, and compassion.”

This is the mission of LA Animal Services. We are here to acknowledge that in a time of war and violence, the circle of compassion is not diminished but rather grows larger and larger each day. We are here to affirm the small work we started in faith is growing stronger and stronger every day.

At a time of unprecedented evil, we are making an evolutionary leap, a leap that may go unnoticed by many, but a leap nonetheless of thinking beings consciously expanding the circle of compassion to include all creatures. We are here to assert and demonstrate by our actions that love, life, compassion, kindness and mercy are stronger than hate, violence and death.

According to Albert Schweitzer, the “Affirmation of life is a spiritual act;” performed by thinking beings. As thinking beings we affirm and embrace life saving No-Kill programs like New Hope, Big Fix, FELIX, STAR, TLC, the Bottle Baby and Foster programs, and Safety Net as a compassionate means to finally eliminate the troubling conditions of our lost and homeless pets.

I am asking all thinking Angelinos to help us make Los Angeles the safest City in the United States for our pets in 2007! We can solve the problems of pet overpopulation without sacrificing our compassion or humanity, and we can do this together this year!

(Note: I apologize if any religious referrences within this message offended anybody. The text has been edited to be less offensive. The message is intended only to encourage respect for the lives of our community’s lost and homeless pets. Happy New Year! Ed)